sdrc 9.3.1 learning report october 2017 · a hard-wired protection system that automatically...

DRAFT – SDRC 9.3.1 Understanding customers’ requirements

UK Power Networks (Operations) Limited. Registered in England and Wales. Registered No. 3870728. Registered Office: Newington House, 237 Southwark Bridge Road, London, SE1 6NP

of 35

Powerful-CB SDRC 9.3.1 Learning Report Understanding customers’ requirements October 2017

SDRC 9.3.1 Understanding customers’ requirements

UK Power Networks (Operations) Limited. Registered in England and Wales. Registered No. 3870728. Registered Office: Newington House, 237 Southwark Bridge Road, London, SE1 6NP of 35

Project overview

The Powerful-CB (Power Electronic Fault Limiting Circuit Breaker) project aims to demonstrate that Fault-Limiting

Circuit Breakers (FLCBs) can enable more Distributed Generation (DG) to connect to fault-level constrained networks.

A power electronic FLCB is a solid-state circuit breaker that operates 20 times faster than traditional vacuum circuit

breakers. It can block 100% of fault level contribution but allows load current to flow normally before and after the fault

as soon as the fault has been cleared.

We will be trialling two methods to allow generators to connect to fault-level constrained 11kV networks:

Method 1 – Installing a device at a substation, to allow multiple generators to connect; and

Method 2 – Installing a device at a customer site, to allow a single generator to connect.

The journey towards a low carbon economy is revolutionising the way we produce, distribute and consume electricity.

Whilst we continue to operate and invest in our network to maintain a safe, secure, and sustainable power supply to

8.2 million homes and businesses, we need to make use of smart, flexible, and innovative techniques to ensure

delivery of our outputs, minimise the cost impact on consumers, and manage the increased complexity of this low

carbon world.

To date we have over 300MW of combined heat and power (CHP) connected to our London network but the ability to

connect more may be limited as a result of fault level constraints. The traditional fault level solutions are an inhibit

agreement (therefore restricting output), connection at a higher voltage level and network reinforcement with the latter

two resulting in an expensive connection which may make projects financially unfeasible.

We are transforming our business into a Distribution System Operator1 to respond to the needs of our customers, both

now and in the future, and working with the wider industry to help deliver decarbonisation of the electricity system at

the least cost. The Government’s Carbon Plan and the Department of Energy & Climate Change (now known as BEIS)

Community Energy Strategy report2 highlight the importance of CHP in achieving the UK’s carbon targets. The Mayor

of London’s target3 is to generate 25% of London’s heat and power requirements locally by 2025. We expect this to

encourage CHP and district heating for new developments.

1 http://futuresmart.ukpowernetworks.co.uk/ 2 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/275163/20140126Community_Energy_Strategy.pdf 3 https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/london-plan/current-london-plan/london-plan-chapter-five-londons-response/poli-0



1 Executive summary

This is the first Powerful-CB Successful Delivery Reward Criteria (SDRC) report which outlines the engagement we

have had with customers to understand their requirements and showcases some of the key results and learning points

that have been made so far in the project. Understanding customer requirements is an important activitity in the project

and we have had discussions and feedback from customers and other stakeholders on the FLCB device cost,

operation, maintenance, and BAU rollout plans amongst other topics. Method 2 trial participation has been a key

engagement point for many customers and these engagement activities have naturally run in conjunction with trial

recruitment.

Since the project initiation, we have engaged with customers and other stakeholders at a number of external events,

through social media, mailing lists, our Powerful-CB online survey and the launch of a project customer working group.

Our key learning points have arisen from data across engagement with multiple customers through survey answers as

well as individual conversations. The key areas and learning points which are discussed in detail in the report are

shown below:

We have gained valuable feedback from customers and other stakeholders on the merits and challenges of both

methods through a variety of engagement activities. We have seen positive engagement and interest from a range of

different customers. This report is designed to outline our learning so far from engaging with customers and

stakeholders and we will report further in project progress reports and future SDRC reports as the project develops.

Powerful-CB has wide scale applicability

FLCB technology is of interest to a wide range of customer types from a geographic spread

Identified customers opinions on benefits and concerns

Customers have expressed a range of potential benefits and concerns relating to Powerful-CB but some

key themes emerged relating to finance and technology maturity

Explored potential commercial and logistical arrangements

Future success will depend on appropriate tailoring of commercial and logistical options and

arrangements



2 Table of contents

1 Executive summary ................................................................................................................................................... 3 2 Table of contents ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 3 Glossary .................................................................................................................................................................... 5 4 About us .................................................................................................................................................................... 6 5 Workstream 3 (WS3) summary ................................................................................................................................. 7 6 Stakeholder engagement .......................................................................................................................................... 8 7 Our engagement timeline .......................................................................................................................................... 9 8 Key learning ............................................................................................................................................................ 11

8.1 Powerful-CB has wide scale applicability .................................................................................................... 12 8.2 Identified customers opinions on benefits and concerns ............................................................................. 13 8.3 Explored potential commercial and logistical arrangements ....................................................................... 15

9 Challenges, mitigations and next steps .................................................................................................................. 17 9.1 Challenges and mitigation methods ............................................................................................................. 17 9.2 Next steps .................................................................................................................................................... 17

10 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................... 19 11 Appendix ................................................................................................................................................................. 20

11.1 Stakeholder engagement summary ............................................................................................................. 20 11.2 DG customer forum 9 February 2017 .......................................................................................................... 21 11.3 DG customer forum 18 July 2017 ................................................................................................................ 22 11.4 Powerful-CB survey ..................................................................................................................................... 23 11.5 Customer surgeries ...................................................................................................................................... 26 11.6 Customer working group 6 September 2017 ............................................................................................... 27 11.7 Association of Decentralised Energy (ADE) membership forums ............................................................... 28 11.8 Frequently Asked Questions – Method 2 (Applied Materials) ..................................................................... 29 11.9 Understanding Customers’ Requirements information gathering form ........................................................ 33 11.10 Site Selection Criteria form .......................................................................................................................... 35



3 Glossary

Term Description

ADE Association for Decentralised Energy

BAU Business As Usual

CB Circuit Breaker – Protection device that interrupts the flow of current in an electric circuit in the event of a fault.

CHP Combined Heat and Power – Simultaneous generation of usable heat and power (usually electricity) in a single process; more efficient than generating heat and power separately.

DG Distributed Generation – Generators that are connected to the distribution network.

DNO Distribution Network Operator

ENWL Electricity North West Limited

Fault Current A surge of energy that flows through the network in the event of a fault. The energy comes from the momentum of rotating generators and motors connected to the network.

Fault Level The maximum fault current that could theoretically flow during a fault.

“Make” fault level is the maximum fault current that could flow during the first current peak of the fault, and that a circuit breaker closing onto a fault would need to safely handle.

“Break” fault level is the maximum fault current that could be flowing 100ms after the start of the fault, and that a circuit breaker clearing the fault would need to be able to interrupt.

Fault Level Headroom

The difference between fault level and fault rating at a particular substation or part of the network; corresponding to the amount of generation that can be connected to the network without exceeding its fault rating.

FCL Fault Current Limiter – a FLMT that attenuates fault current by increasing its impedance (only) during a fault.

FLCB Fault Limiting Circuit Breaker – a FLMT that blocks fault level contributions from a transformer / bus coupler / generator by disconnecting it before the first current peak of the fault.

FLMT Fault Level Mitigation Technology – a technical solution that reduces fault levels on the network.

GB Great Britain

GLA The Greater London Authority

Inhibit / Intertrip Scheme

A hard-wired protection system that automatically disconnects generators from the network under pre-defined conditions, typically in the event of a transformer outage or other abnormal network configuration that causes elevated fault levels.

M1 Method 1 - Installation of a FLCB at a substation

M2 Method 2 - Installation of a FLCB at a customer’s premises

RIIO-ED1 The current electricity distribution price control, running from 2015 to 2023

Rotating DG A generator that converts mechanical energy to electrical energy using a synchronous AC rotating alternator, e.g. CHP and diesel standby generators. These types of generators have a much larger impact on fault levels than inverter-connected generators e.g. solar PV.

SDRC Successful Delivery Reward Criteria

Triad The Triads are the three half-hour settlement periods with highest system demand between November and February, separated by at least ten clear days. National Grid uses the Triads to determine Transmission Network Use of System charges for customers with half-hour metering.

TRL Technology Readiness Level

UKPN UK Power Networks

UPS Uninterruptible Power Supply

WPD Western Power Distribution



4 About us

UK Power Networks provides power to a quarter of the UK’s population via its electricity distribution networks and is

committed to:

Maintaining a safe, secure and sustainable power supply to over eight million homes and businesses in

London, the South East and the East of England;

Developing what is already Britain’s biggest electricity network – including over 112,000 11kV secondary circuit

breakers;

Strengthening our links with the local communities we serve and building on the skills base of the 5,500 people

who work for us across the network; and

Giving our customer the best possible service and maintaining operational efficiency across our network areas.

We have a clear vision to be the best performing Distribution Network Operator (DNO) in the UK over the 2015/16 to

2018/19 regulatory period, the first four years of RIIO-ED1. We will achieve this by demonstrating industry leadership in

the three areas below:

The safest The most reliable The lowest cost

The best employer The best service

The most innovative

The most socially

responsible

Our innovation strategy follows our corporate vision, which underpins our mission and provides clarity of purpose. A

key success indicator in delivering our vision is to be classed as the “Most Innovative DNO”; as such it is core to how

we do business. A successful innovation programme will support all three elements of our corporate vision; for example

innovation is a central component of our strategy continuing to be the lowest cost electricity distributor. Our innovation

procedure outlines the objectives of innovation – showing why we innovate.

Delivering high

performance today

through innovation

and the benchmark

for best practice.

A future-ready

distribution business

providing new services,

which meet the needs of

tomorrow’s customers.

Consistently credited as an

active facilitator of, and not an

obstacle to the low carbon

transition.

Efficient

&

Effective

Future

Ready

Low

Carbon

Ready



5 Workstream 3 (WS3) summary The activities in WS3 are designed to engage with customers and other external stakeholders on matters relating to the Powerful-CB trial and the wider use of FLCBs in the UKPN area and the rest of GB. Specifically, the activities are broken down into two categories, which were explained in the Full Submission Proposal4 as:

WS3a - Customer dialogue

WS3a is designed to both inform stakeholders of what the two Methods are and what they can technically accomplish for them, as well as gather information on what their criteria would be to assess the suitability of the two Methods if connecting new generation. It aims to gain an insight on the customer requirements and expectations for potentially using either of the two Methods for a new connection. This will be achieved by engaging with relevant customers through focus groups and workshops. Our approach will be to target specifically those people most likely to connect new CHP generation and also those generation customers who see connections costs as a primary barrier to new connections. The result will be an open dialogue with customers to understand their decision parameters. These may include space, cost/security trade-off, etc. Additionally, through our relationship with the Greater London Authority we will seek to better understand CHP and district heating use cases for both Methods, considering the needs of councils and developers. The user requirements and expectations will inform the work in WS3b.

The technical requirements will be based on the results from WS1 and WS2. These requirements define the

constraints which are inevitable with the technology. The customer expectations for how the technologies will work best

for their needs will be gained through customer dialogue in WS3a, from feedback from the trial participant, and from

reviewing other similar projects like ENWL’s Respond project’s customer survey5. The information gathering will be

designed with the purpose of demonstrating the commercial feasibility of the FLCB technology. This may include cost

benefit analysis of the FLCBs technology, market size and receptiveness.

WS3b - Suitability assessment

Once we have learned what customer needs are for using the two different Methods, we will conduct a desktop based exercise to match these expectations against technical constraints and variations. We will then combine those requirements against how the devices best meet customer needs from WS3a to develop the inputs which customers can use for their own individual commercial business cases. Specifically, the assessment will explore the trade-offs between different needs and technical constraints. The results and learning will be captured in the ‘Learning Report – suitability assessment’ report, presenting the assessment of the suitability of the different trialled solutions. This will be based on the measured technical performance and identified customers’ needs. The end result will present information DG customers can use as part of potential business cases to support investment in DG.

4 https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/system/files/docs/2016/11/powerful-cb_nic_fsp_resubmission_2016-10-20-1700_non-confidential.pdf 5 http://www.enwl.co.uk/docs/default-source/respond-key-documents/respond-customer-report-may-2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4



6 Stakeholder engagement

Stakeholder engagement and learning dissemination activities are key to the successful delivery of Innovation projects.

Below are our four stages to successful engagement.

Customers

Project sponsors

Suppliers

DNOs

Collaborate

Consult

Inform

Clear direction

Identify methods of

communication

Frequency of

communications

Listen “you said”

Deliver

o We did

o We will do

2. Assess interest 1. Identify stakeholders 3. Develop plan 4. Engage

Appendix

11.1, 11.2, 11.3 &

11.4

Appendix

11.5

Appendix

11.1

Appendix

11.2, 11.3, 11.4, 11.5 &

11.6


UK Power Networks (Operations) Limited. Registered in England and Wales. Registered No. 3870728. Registered Office: Newington House, 237 Southwark Bridge Road, London, SE1 6NP

of 35

7 Our engagement timeline

Attended ENWL RESPOND learning event and WPD FlexDGrid final dissemination event.

Peer learning was an important aspect and we attended two DNO events; concerns around Triad revenue for existing customers were identified by

ENWL and this encouraged us to ask the ‘right questions’ early on.

Emailed to the DG mailing

list (circa 780 stakeholders)

Jul-17

Jan-17 Network external online

Feb-17

We were keen to spread the word with our well-established DG mailing list in addition to releasing a

news article. The platform for our initial face-to-face communication was the bi-annual DG customer

forum. This event identified a potential trial participant and detailed customer dialogue then

commenced. See Appendix 11.2

SurveyMonkey published

In order for customers to engage without a face-to-face meeting and to provide the ability for anonymity, the project team launched the Powerful-

CB survey, which we circulated to customers and other stakeholders through a range of internal and external mailing lists, social media outlets

and via direct conversation. The survey asked nine simple questions, none of which were mandatory. The aim of the survey was to assess

customer interest in and the understanding of the project, the technology and the trial. See Appendix 11.4

We collated an FAQ document (see Appendix 11.8). It is understandable and expected that many of the queries and much of the interest lay in the

commercial arrangements of the technology and its applications on the electricity distribution networks.

Feedback from the event has been positive and a potential trial site was identified during the day .



See next

steps section

9.2

77% of attendees rated the topic

‘very useful’

DG customer forum

Jul-17

Returning to the DG customer forum in July provided us with an opportunity to engage further with

this community. We explained the problem some customers are facing and the methods we wish to

trial. Referring to the feedback provided at the event, 77% of the audience rated the topic as “very

useful” and we followed up with 16 customers who asked to be kept informed about the project.

Arranging surgeries to provide customers with the opportunity to discuss their requirements and

concerns proved worthwhile. To date 10 customers have met with us to discuss their experiences

and nine potential sites have been identified to trial M2. See Appendix 11.3

Sept-17

Next event Mar-18

Our first customer working group was held Wednesday 6 September 2017. Seven stakeholders

from a variety of backgrounds joined us. Our presentation covered previous fault level limiting

technologies tried and tested, how our London 11kV network operates, the current mitigation

solutions offered, what power electronics are and the terms of reference for the group.

Many customers who we have engaged with, from the initial DG Customer Forum in February

through to the working group, have shown interest in the technology once maturity levels have

increased and the technology can be used in a BAU situation.



8 Key learning

Engaging with customers has been a vital aspect of this project to date. In addition to finding a customer site for the

M2 trial, it is important to the ongoing success of the technology and the trial, that customer requirements and needs

are discussed and shared in the early stages of prototyping. In order to achieve this, we have undertaken a number of

different customer engagement activities in order to engage with a wide range of customers, but also to talk more in

depth with stakeholders who expressed a particular interest. The learning which we have gained from customer

engagement to date has been insightful and this section discusses our key learning points.

We have showcased a sample of the data as evidence for these learning points, sourced from our customer survey,

surgeries, DG customer forum presentations and Powerful-CB customer working group. A full set of data from these

sources, including a breakdown of customer surgery attendance by customer type and a full survey response dataset

can be found in our Appendices.

General Feedback

86% of survey respondents said fault level

constraints had caused issues in them connecting to the network Survey result

“There are a few [site]

options, within the broader

GB area, where I know fault

level has been an issue.”

Customer surgery

79% of survey respondents said finance was a

concern Survey result

23% of survey respondents said fault level

constraints were the most important issue on the networks at present Survey result

NUISANCE TRIPPING

was listed as the second top concern of survey

respondents

Survey result

77% of those who attended the DG customer

forum Jul-17 rated the project ‘very useful’ DG customer forum Jul-17

CHEAPER, QUICKER connections were the major incentives

Survey result “UKPN have taken a positive pro-

active approach to this serious

problem. The results should assist

the growth of DG on the congested

GB distribution network.”

Powerful-CB customer working group Sept-17

“I think it is really positive, that you realise, you can have a wonderful technical

solution, but it’s really “hearts and minds” with the customer to ensure that

they’re on board, and they understand, what it is you are providing and where

the benefits to them are, because quite often you can stumble on that point!”

Customer surgery

“This project is extremely interesting, in that it offers solutions to a growing problem within the UK electricity networks.”

Powerful-CB customer working group Sept-17



8.1 Powerful-CB has wide scale applicability

Key Learning Point: FLCB technology is of interest to a wide range of customer types from a geographic

spread

Response to the engagement activities has been positive, with strong interest in the project. 86% of survey

respondents have previously encountered issues with fault level. 23% of customers shared their opinion that fault level

constraints were the most important network issue at present, as well as 62% answering that it was an issue equal to

others the network is currently facing. This is encouraging, indicating that there may be many applications of the

technology once the project concludes. It solidifies the justification of the project and shows there is a need to tackle

fault level constraints using new technology.

It has been particularly notable that

many customers were interested in the

wider application of this technology,

beyond the London network and even

beyond the UK Power Networks’

licensee areas. This encouraging

customer feedback will mean that

engagement with other DNOs

throughout the project will be vital to see

the future success of the technology in

the rest of the country. For our project, it

means that engagement beyond our

networks’ boundaries will be important

for future dissemination events.

In addition to this, we have had the opportunity to

discuss this project with a number of customers who

own or operate inverter-fed generation and storage,

both at events and at customer surgeries. While these

generation types are generally not seen to contribute

significantly to fault levels, the interest from these

generators in FLCB technology shows that fault level

constraints are beginning to be of concern to a range of

customer types.

Inverter-fed generators contribute significantly less to fault level than synchronous generators. This means that if an

inverter-fed generator is unable to connect because of fault level issues, it is because there is zero fault level

headroom, hence they can only connect if they can reduce their fault level contribution to zero. For customers wishing

to use fault limiting technology to enable their network connection in these cases, an FLCB is the only device that can

achieve the 100% reduction in fault contribution that is required.

We will continue to engage with the wide customer base throughout the project, through the customer working group

and other external events to continue to gain insight to the applicability of FLCB devices beyond the Powerful-CB trial.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

London

SE

Ea

st

An

oth

er

DN

O r

egio

n

Oth

er

- outs

ide G

B

Mu

lti- w

ithin

GB

Mu

lti- inte

rnatio

nally

8. In which region are you based?

“Fault level headroom is frequently a

problem for our energy storage sites,

and we have been looking at devices

to reduce our fault contribution.”

Customer email



8.2 Identified customers opinions on benefits and concerns

Key Learning Point: Customers have expressed a range of potential preferences and business drivers relating

to Powerful-CB but some key themes emerged relating to finance and technology maturity

One of the key aims of customer engagement

activities to date has been to understand

customers’ views on potential benefits and

concerns relating to trial participation and the wider

use of FLCB technology.

Feedback and data on this theme has reflected customer

interests surrounding costs and connection offers; survey

results have shown that cheaper and quicker connections

are the key drivers in terms of expected benefits. While this

is not surprising, the fact that only 36% of customers

showed firmer connections being a driver is linked to the

wide interest discussed in the previous section.

In terms of technology concerns, finance is rated as the

greatest concern, as 79% of respondents listed this in their

survey answer. A close second, nuisance tripping at 77%

shows operational concerns which are discussed further in

the below section.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14P

rom

ise

of a firm

er

con

nection

Ad

ditio

nal fin

ancia

lin

centive

Quic

ke

r C

on

nection

Cheape

r C

onnectio

n

Ab

ility

to o

pera

te in

abnorm

al netw

ork

con

ditio

ns

Fa

ult R

ide thro

ugh

cap

abili

ty Oth

er

4. What would encourage you to install a FLCB at your site? (Please tick as many as applicable and add others in the comment

box)More choice of technology

02468

1012

Sp

ace

Fin

ance

Weig

ht

Nuis

an

ce

Trip

pin

g

Logis

tics o

fin

sta

llatio

n

Inte

rfere

nce w

ith

ancill

ary

serv

ices

Te

chnolo

gy

Ma

turity

Oth

er

5. If you were considering installing an FLCB at your site, what would concern you? (please tick as many as applicable and add others or more information in comment box)

“The fault limiting idea is something I've

had an interest in for some time now. It

has always appeared too costly

especially for larger generators.”

Customer email

“If it allows connection in areas we

could not do before, then £300k

[projected cost for Method 2] is fine”

Powerful-CB customer working group feedback

“How will the [cost] change over time? Will the cost

vary depending on [generator] size?”

Powerful-CB customer working group feedback

“Fault levels are also a large issue in other

DNO regions, we are curious as to if this

might help us in the future.”

Customer email

Our project attracted interest from customers

in other DNO regions and we were pleased

to hear the solution already has an appetite

for deployment outside of our area.



From initial engagement, it has been encouraging that customers who do not have a suitable trial site would still be

interested in engaging further with the project and technology as the technology progresses upwards along the TRL

scale and into BAU applications. This evidence continued into survey results where 21% respondents showed they

would be interested once the FLCB technology is BAU and 37% were interested in engaging with UKPN throughout the

trial on defining requirements.

Throughout surgeries with customers, it has been useful to explore customer concerns surrounding technology

operations further. Discussions surrounding the device operation have often alleviated customer concerns, and have

allowed us to determine where future effort is required in communications and project awareness. A concern around

the environmental conditions for the M2 device to be situated in, for example in a boiler room, will be addressed in a

future design meeting.

Question: Will the FLCB disconnect

the generator or does it just provide

an enhanced level of monitoring and

control to shut off any faults should it

occur at time of network

abnormalities?

Customer surgery

Answer: The idea is that it disconnects really

quickly, so it does not actually contribute to fault

level, so rather than trip you when we are running

abnormally, we would allow you to continue

operating until we actually get a fault. Under these

conditions, your generator is tripped, before you

can contribute current to the fault.

Customer surgery

“We are used to living in a world of

planned and unplanned outages...

For us, adding more capacity is worth

small additional risk”

Customer surgery

As noted in the survey responses, interaction with ancillary services

is a concern for a number of customers. When discussing this in

more detail during customer surgeries, it has been interesting to

listen to different customer views on this matter – with some

accepting interactions with ancillary service contracts as an

acceptable part of their risk profile. This potential area of concern is

one we would like to address further with customers at a future

customer working group event.

9%

18%

55%

18%

How are you able to help?

I’d like to trial a FLCB on my premises as part of my generation project

I’d like to engage during the trial to help UKPN understand customer’s requirements for fault level solutions

I’d like to know more once it’s ready for BAU

I’m not interested in this technology



8.3 Explored potential commercial and logistical arrangements

Key Learning Point: Future success will depend on appropriate commercial and logistical options and

arrangements

Customers have been keen to discuss the connection offer and agreement arrangements for sites using M2 FLCB

devices.

Customers’ opinions on the differing

benefits of the two methods has been a

focus area of engagement activities. Our

initial interaction with customers at the DG

Customer Forum in February 2017 showed

that the majority of customers favoured the

M2 customer located solution. The survey

results show that the majority of

respondents see benefits in both M1 and

M2. These differing results could have a

number of influencing factors including

more answer options (the ability to answer

‘both’ in the survey) and more

understanding of the M1 substation

solution.

“From my perspective … as an end user or developer, I am interested in

the customer version [M2]” Customer surgery

0

2

4

6

8

10

Customer Site Substation No preference - both beneficial No preference - neitherbeneficial

3. Would you have a preference over where an FLCB was located?

“I have seen it happen before, it all goes

swimmingly and then there is different

perceptions of responsibilities for the asset, who

owns it and what happens if it breaks. It would

be good to get [those issues] out of the way

now.”

Customer surgery



Discussions surrounding connection offers and

connection agreements have been prevalent in

engagement activities. Although the initial target

customer base for M2 trial participation consisted of

customers on inhibit connection agreements, it has been

promising to hear from a number of customers to whom

this criteria does not apply. In fact, many of the

customers who have come forward with potential trial

sites are not on such a connection agreement and only

36% of survey respondents indicated that a firmer

connection would be an incentive of interest. Instead,

many customers operate sites where existing generation

is connected but there is a desire to increase the export

capacity in the coming years, and they may not be able

to due to fault level. The exact nature of connection

offers for sites with FLCB devices installed will be a

focus area of work when engaging with customers and

internal stakeholders as the project progresses.

Survey answers surrounding the installation/ownership/operation/maintenance responsibilities were diverse – there

was no clear preference amongst survey respondents and this continues to provide varying preferences as we

continue further discussions with customers. This is certainly an area that will need more focus moving forwards,

particularly when looking beyond the trial site. Decisions into the offerings made to customers will be vital in ensuring

successful uptake of the FLCB technology.

“I would expect the

installation works to be a

contestable element [of the

connection offer]”

Powerful-CB customer working group

“From a financial point of view, you want to know

how often your generator will be switched off; no

one will lend money if the business case does not

stack up!”

Powerful-CB customer working group

0123456789

10

Insta

llatio

n y

ou

Insta

llatio

n 3

rd p

art

y

Ow

ne

rsh

ip y

ou

Ow

ne

rsh

ip 3

rd p

art

y

Op

era

tio

n y

ou

Op

era

tio

n 3

rd p

art

y

Ma

inte

na

nce y

ou

Ma

inte

na

nce 3

rd p

art

y

6. If you were to have an FLCB installed at your site, who would you prefer to carry out these responsibilities for the equipment?

‘You’ meaning customer



9 Challenges, mitigations and next steps

The financial considerations around the installation and operation of FLCB devices and the connection agreement that

follows is of particular interest to the project team moving forwards.

9.1 Challenges and mitigation methods

When discussing the needs of customers in relation to the trial, the project team have aimed to ensure participation

from a wide stakeholder group. In order to achieve this, we have identified a number of potential challenges that could

prevent achieving wider stakeholder engagement and accordingly a number of methods to mitigate the potential impact

of these challenges.

Potential Challenge Mitigation Methods

Customers have engaged with us

more about M2 than M1

- Our survey asks questions relating to both methods

- We plan to hold a customer working group focusing on M1 in the future

- We engaged with a number of customers, not only those interested in

participating in the trial

The customers who engage are

not representative of the wider

generator community

- By making use of existing internal communication channels such as the

DG customer forums, DG customer mailing list, we engaged with a

number of different customer types

- By making use of external communication channels through our

connections with the Association of Decentralised Energy

Customers may not want to

engage face to face

- By publishing a SurveyMonkey which allowed anonymity

- By providing paper copies of the survey for people to complete and return

offline

Customers only want to engage

through channels they already

know

- By working with the relevant UKPN connections teams to engage with

customers

- Having members of the connections teams present during customer

surgeries

Reduced interest from

customers due to capacity range

of device

- Ensuring conversation with customers is open to both M1 and M2 devices

to widen the interest and participation

- Capturing future requirements for product evolution

Throughout the remainder of the trial, we will continue to manage these challenges as well as update with new

challenges that we become aware of. We will publish these in our project progress reports.

9.2 Next steps

The work in understanding customer needs will continue and develop as the trial moves forward. We will continue to

engage with customers and other stakeholders on this topic and continue to report on learnings through project

progress reports. To date, our activities in understanding customer needs have given us a good overview and

introduction to the key requirements and concerns of customers.

Our next steps will be to dig deeper into the areas that interest stakeholders, in particular surrounding the financial

aspects of the technology and its application on our electricity networks. We will review customers’ technical questions

and concerns with our technology partners and aim to modify the design where possible, to best meet customers’

decision parameters.

Those who attended the customer working group event held 6 September 2017 were engaged and willing to interact in

an open forum to discuss their concerns. We plan to run further customer working group events with invited guest

speakers from a number of organisations, including a site visit of the trial sites at a later point during the project.



The range of customer engagement activities and approach has enabled breadth and depth in discussion, and we will

continue with this approach as we move forwards in the project. The activities currently planned are outlined below:

Planned Activity Description Indicative dates/milestones

Further customer working groups - Plan a schedule of future

working group events

- Engage with external

speakers on relevant topics

- Target March 2018 for next

working group to include

details on trial participants

Public Seminar/Webinar - Plan a schedule of learning

events

- Target summer 2018 for

dissemination of trial

learning to far

Further Customer Surgeries - Continue to engage with

customers who are

interested in becoming trial

participants

- Site Selection to be carried

out in November 2017

Draft Trial Contract / Connection

Agreement

- Contract negotiation also

allows for commercial

arrangements to be open to

discussion for the BAU case

- Internal stakeholder

engagement required



10 Conclusion

This first Powerful-CB SDRC report has showcased our learning so far in the task of understanding customer needs of

the Powerful-CB methods – an area where the project team have made good progress to date. A number of formal

customer engagement activities have taken place which have led to a better understanding of customer requirements

and a greater awareness of the project amongst potential M2 trial participants. Customer and wider stakeholder

engagement has been positive, with a wide range of different stakeholders expressing interest in the technology even if

they are not eligible to be trial participants for M2. This interest shows good promise in transitioning the technology

from innovation trial to BAU.

We will continue to refine our understanding of customers’ requirements as the project progresses. Customer

engagement so far has identified a number of areas that require further focus and attention, in particular surrounding

the commercial aspect of the technology, not just capital expenditure but connection agreements for future projects

using the technology in both methods. A number of other activities will attract focus in WS3 moving forwards,

noticeably engagement with other DNOs and better understanding of CHP and district heating applications through

interactions with the ADE and the GLA. WS3 activities will continue to be reported in project progress reports and

future SDRCs.

In summary, the aims of WS3 and how and when they will be evidenced is shown in the below table:

Workstream 3 Aim Evidence Where evidence is found

Inform stakeholders of what the

two methods are and what they

can technically accomplish for

them

- Engagement activities

- Slide deck used in customer

working group

- Appendix 11.2 & 11.3

- Appendix 11.6

Gather information on customer

requirements and criteria for

assessing the suitability of the

two methods

- Answers to survey questions

- Data from customer

surgeries

- Appendix 11.4

- Appendix 11.5

Better understand the CHP and

district heating use case for both

methods

Engagement with:

- ADE

- GLA membership

- Appendix 11.7

- Introduction meeting 30

November 2016, participation in

customer working group 6

September 2017. Follow up

meeting to be arranged

Gather insight on the customer

expectations for how the

technologies will work best for

their needs

- Answers to survey questions

- Data from customer

surgeries

- Appendix 11.4

- Appendix 11.5

Explore trade-offs between

different needs and technical

constraints

- Discussions at customer

working group

- Appendix 11.6

Delivery of the agreed number of

engagement activities with

customers

- Customer engagement

overview

- Section 8



11 Appendix

11.1 Stakeholder engagement summary

Our plan captures whom we have engaged with, their interest level and if they wished to collaborate, to consult or if

they wish to be kept informed about the project.

Internal stakeholders include our Major Connections teams, Distribution Planners and Service Development team. We

have attended two other DNO dissemination events (WPD FlexDGrid and ENWL RESPOND).

55 stakeholders, covering developers, installers, consultants, independent connection providers, government,

associations and universities have engaged with us, with the following roles:

Collaborate 17;

Consult 8; and

Inform 30.

Communication channels we have used include, the DG customer forums, SurveyMonkey, LinkedIn, EventBrite and

the ADE.

We have also shared details of our project with the DG mailing list. This distribution list is managed by our Service

Development team and incorporates over 700 stakeholders subscribed to receive information related to DG.

We will be presenting at The Low Carbon Networks & Innovation conference 6 December 2017. This event will provide

us with the opportunity to further disseminate the project’s learning to date.



11.2 DG customer forum 9 February 2017

The DG customer forum is a UKPN event held bi-annually, to provide our DG stakeholders the opportunity to give their

feedback on our service, consult on our processes and procedures, hear our plans and help us to develop future

initiatives. The event was open to all, which means the audience was diverse covering asset owners, connection

providers, consultants, community energy groups, developers, local authorities and utility companies.

We utilised this event6 to assess the interest of the project and to help identify potential trial participants.

6 http://www.ukpowernetworks.co.uk/internet/en/our-services/documents/DG_customer_forum_presentation_9_February_2017.pdf

9%

18%

55%

18%

How are you able to help?

I’d like to trial a FLCB on my premises as part of my generation project

I’d like to engage during the trial to help UKPN understand customer’s requirements for fault level solutionsI’d like to know more once it’s ready for BAU

I’m not interested in this technology

05

101520

Asset Owner CommunityEnergy

Consultant DG Developer Energy/Utilitycompany

IndependentConnections

Provider

Operator Owner Storage andflexibleservicesprovider

Stakeholder group

05

10152025

AD Biomass CHP Diesel Gas Other Solar PV Steam Storage Waste Wind

Technology type

14

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

<50kW

>50kW to <250kW

>250kW to <1MW

>1MW to <5MW

>5MW to <50MW

>50MW

Capacity bracket

35%

65%

Which do you think is the best place to install a FCL or FLCB?

DNO Substation Customers' premises



11.3 DG customer forum 18 July 2017

Customers who showed particular interest through

any other engagement activity were invited to

participate in an individual customer surgery with

the Powerful-CB team, to discuss any particular

interest or concern further. These surgeries have

been predominantly used to discuss potential trial

sites for M2 with 8 surgeries resulting in 9 potential

trial sites being identified. A number of relevant

thoughts and comments have been raised and

noted by the project team.

0

5

10

15

Asset Owner CommunityEnergy

Consultant DGDeveloper

Energy/Utilitycompany

IndependentConnections

Provider

Operator Other Owner Storage andflexibleservicesprovider

Stakeholder groupHousing

associationUtility

8

0

20

40

AD Biomass CHP Diesel Gas Other Solar PV Steam Storage Tidal Waste Wind

Generation type

22

0 10 20 30 40

<50kW

>50kW to <250kW

>250kW to <1MW

>1MW to <5MW

>5MW to <50MW

>50MW

Capacity bracket

16 customers

expressed an

interest in the

project

31%



11.4 Powerful-CB survey

The survey questions and answers are found in the following pages:

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Yes No - neverattempted to

connect

No - never causeda problem

1. Have Fault Current Headroom Constraints ever caused an issue for you connecting

generation to a network?

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

CustomerSite

Substation Nopreference -

bothbeneficial

Nopreference -

neitherbeneficial

3. Would you have a preference over where an FLCB was located?

0123456789

Mo

st im

po

rtan

tis

sue

An

im

po

rta

nt

issue

equ

al to

oth

ers

An

im

po

rta

nt

issue

but

oth

ers

are

more

imp

ort

an

t

Not

an

urg

en

tis

sue

2. How important to you is it to improve methods of managing fault current on the network in comparison to other network issues? E.g. voltage constraints, thermal constraints, reverse power flow, upstream

transmission constraints?

Screen shot of online survey



0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Sp

ace

Fin

an

ce

We

igh

t

Nu

isa

nce

Tri

ppin

g

Log

istics o

fin

sta

llatio

n

Inte

rfe

ren

ce

with

ancill

ary

se

rvic

es

Te

ch

no

logy M

atu

rity

Oth

er

5. If you were considering installing an FLCB at your site, what would concern you? (please tick as many as applicable and add others or

more information in comment box)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Insta

llatio

n Y

ou

Insta

llatio

n 3

rd p

art

y

Ow

ne

rsh

ip y

ou

Ow

ne

rsh

ip 3

rd p

art

y

Op

era

tio

n y

ou

Op

era

tio

n 3

rd p

art

y

Ma

inte

na

nce y

ou

Ma

inte

na

nce 3

rd p

art

y

6. If you were to have an FLCB installed at your site, who would you prefer to carry out

these responsibilities for the equipment?

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Inte

reste

d in

tri

al

Inte

reste

d in

he

arin

g m

ore

once

BA

U

Inte

reste

d b

ut site

doe

s n

ot

qua

lify

Inte

reste

d to

en

ga

ge

on

futu

re r

eq

uire

me

nts

Not

inte

reste

d

7. How would you like to engage with this technology?

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Pro

mis

e o

f a

firm

er

con

nectio

n

Ad

ditio

na

l fina

ncia

lin

ce

ntive

Qu

icker

Co

nn

ectio

n

Che

ap

er

Con

ne

ction

Ab

ility

to o

pera

te in

abn

orm

al n

etw

ork

con

ditio

ns

Fa

ult R

ide

thro

ugh

cap

abili

ty Oth

er

4. What would encourage you to install a FLCB at your site? (Please tick as many as applicable and add others in the comment

box)

More choice of technology and system



0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Lon

do

n

SE

Ea

st

An

oth

er

DN

O r

egio

n

Oth

er

- o

uts

ide

GB

Mu

lti- w

ith

in G

B

Mu

lti- in

tern

atio

na

lly

8. In which region are you based?

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Custo

me

r (g

en

)

Custo

me

r (l

oa

d)

DN

O

Acad

em

ic

Indu

str

y b

od

y

Ge

nera

tor

ma

nu

factu

rer

Cir

cu

it B

rea

ke

rm

an

ufa

ctu

rer

Oth

er

(sp

ecify)

9. What type of organisation do you belong to? (Please tick as many as applicable and

write others in the comment box)



11.5 Customer surgeries

We followed up with interested stakeholders by inviting them to join us either by Skype call or in person to a customer

surgery. The surgeries were hosted by, the Project Lead, Workstream Lead and a Distribution Planning Engineer. By

having the right people in the room, we were able to answer questions and alleviate some concerns as well as capture

issues that need addressing. The quotes and comments from these surgeries are provided throughout the document.

Surgery Breakdown:

Surgery Customer Type (e.g. generator, consultant) Potential M2 trial site

identified? (Y/N)

1 Manufacturer and Energy Management Advisor Yes

2 Consultant Yes

3 Provider Yes

4 Consultant Yes

5 Consumer Yes

6 Industry body No

7 Energy Development Company Yes

8 Facilities Manager Yes



11.6 Customer working group 6 September 2017

Invitation shared with:

DG mailing list (782 stakeholders); and

Kellie Dillon’s (Innovation Workstream Lead 3 & 4) LinkedIn connections (circa 400).

Eventbrite:

204 views of invitation; and

7 attendees.

Feedback questions Satisfaction

The location & facilities were accessible & satisfactory 86%

The forum was appropriate for my job role 92%

The information coverage was relevant & necessary 94%

The facilitator(s) responded to questions in an information & satisfactory manner 96%

I felt engaged throughout the workshop 90%

The facilitator(s) encouraged healthy & effective discussions 94%

Overall I felt the session was productive and valuable 94%

Would you be interested in attending future customer working groups? 90%

Powerful-CB customer working group presentation http://bit.ly/P-CB_CWG_presentation_06-09-17

http://bit.ly/P-CB_CWG_presentation_06-09-17



11.7 Association of Decentralised Energy (ADE) membership forums

We were invited to speak about Powerful-CB at two ADE events through our relationship with the ADE and their

support of this project.

ADE District Heating and Cooling forum: 11 October 2017

14 members attended the forum. We previously shared the link to our survey and invitation to our customer working

group, with the ADE mailing list.

ADE Commercial forum 18 October 2017

We presented to 11 members of the Commercial forum.

“Does the device have to be installed

inside or can it be outside?”

ADE District Heating and Cooling forum

“We have a fault level issue outside

of your area, what should we do?”

ADE Commercial forum

“I thought your presentation at the ADE was about the best piece of

technical news for CHP developers in the last couple of years”

Customer email

“Talk to us, we still need to capture

the issues you are facing to help

us evolve the solution”

UKPN response

“We are at the early design stage

so can adapt to suit the

environment”

UKPN response



11.8 Frequently Asked Questions – Method 2 (Applied Materials)

What is the technology about?

Connecting generators to electricity networks requires that the network has the capacity to accept the generator

connection. A number of criteria need to be met, including voltage control, thermal capacity of the conductors and that

the network infrastructure can handle the force and heating effects of a short circuit. The device we are trialing is

designed to switch off the generator very quickly when there is a network fault or disturbance such that the generator

does not provide any energy into the fault.

How does it work?

Power electronic switches (Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistors) are stacked in series and parallel configurations to carry

the current and switch it off when a fault occurs. Current transformers measure the magnitude and derive the rate of

change of current and when thresholds are exceeded. The switching process is very fast - 6µs, so there is sufficient

time to determine if the current will exceed the capacity of the switches.

Are these IGBTs new technology?

Not really – they have been used since the 1980s and form the basis of many variable speed industrial drives and

generators. They are however new to the electricity distribution network industry.

Industrial variable speed drives have harmonics associated with them. Will your system cause harmonics on

my site?

No – this is not an issue as the switches are on (or off) continuously.

IGBTs have failure modes which include failure to short circuit – how do I know that the device will work?

We engineer the device to avoid stressing the IGBTs with over-voltage, over-current and heat. We also periodically test

the operation of the device seamlessly so that the generator is not disturbed, but we prove the operation of the

switches.

How do you remove the heat from the unit?

We marshal the heat to an exit point on the top of the unit and from there ducts are needed to take it out of the room.

How do you connect the unit into my network?

The device is cable connected. We are providing top or bottom cable entry points.

How much current and voltage can it take?

Up to 400A, (maybe 500A with some testing), so about 7.5MVA at 11kV.

How big is the unit?

We are targeting a device that is 2.4m deep x 2m long x 2.2m tall. A possible re-configuration would be 1.2m deep x

4m long x 2.2m tall. The squarer configuration would need front and rear ventilation and access (about 1m), with cable

connection access at one end (about 1m). The long, thin configuration would need front ventilation and access with

cable connection access at both ends.



In addition there will be for this installation, isolators and a bypass circuit breaker. The details of the installation will be

site specific.

Can the unit be delivered/assembled in/from parts?

The unit is designed to be delivered/assembled as a single unit, or broken down into parts that can be carried through

a standard door. We recognize for retro-fit installations that unusual solutions to space constraints, e.g. installing into a

substation basement may be necessary.

How heavy is the unit?

This has not yet been calculated but a few tonnes is likely to be the answer.

What are the risks to my site?

While there are a whole range of risks associated with installing new equipment, we think that we will address most of

them in the design and installation procedures. Residual risks result from the fast acting nature and limited overload

capability of the base switching technology.

Nuisance tripping may occur when there is a fast rising spike caused by partial discharge, lightning, energizing

transformers or starting motors.

Site challenges will be captured and disseminated in future reports.

What are the advantages to my site?

The site will be protected from the grid were there to be a fault on the site side of the limiter. This will mitigate damage

to the rest of the site infrastructure. The site (or future sites) will also be able to connect to the UKPN network without

further reinforcement work. Finally, the technology can potentially be developed to integrate fault ride-through

capability, allowing future connections to the grid.

What are the benefits to UKPN and Applied Materials?

UKPN will have another tool in the toolbox to allow the connection of generation, desirable to support the expansion of

CHP in London. Applied Materials get a showcase for their mark 2 solid state fault current limiter.



Is this the first installation?

A similar piece of technology has been installed on a transformer neutral in Victoria, Australia. It was designed to

detect fault current flowing to earth and disconnect the neutral point with the hope that this would prevent bush fires.

The site in Australia is a bush fire testing site where they drop a cable to the ground to try to ignite a specially prepared

piece of the bush (in a container). The limiter has seen over 800 faults, and works as intended but sadly the

capacitance in the cable leaves enough residual current to discharge resulting in bush fires.

How does the installation differ from mine?

The Australian installation is at 22kV, in a transformer neutral point and sees little load current. Yours has much more

current and three phases, and the periodic testing of the IGBTs is new for this project to meet the UK safety case. In

fact there is an independent assessment of the safety case for deploying IGBTs in this application for this project.

Can I visit the installation?

Arrangements for site visits will be discussed with the trial participant. Site access will depend on a number of factors

and those who wish to visit the operational site should register their interest with the Powerful-CB team.

What impact will it have on site protection schemes?

This will be investigated on a site by site basis once a potential trial site is identified.

What happens if it develops a fault or I no longer want to use it?

We will install a bypass and isolation system around the limiter. Operation of the bypass would require the network fault

level to remain within limits.

How do I bypass it?

This will be worked out with UKPN later in the trial.

How do I operate it?

The operations of the device have not been completely specified, however it is likely to require little operation if any at

all. An automatic re-closing scheme is likely to be part of the device once any residual safety issues are resolved.

Can I use it as a circuit breaker?

No – this is a specialist piece of equipment which provides a huge reduction in fault current contribution (nearly 100%)

but does not completely isolate the fault from the generator. It does not for example provide galvanic isolation.

What maintenance does it need?

The unit has fans that suck in filtered air. The filters need to be replaced/cleaned on a frequent basis (as yet

undetermined). The cooling fans also have a working lifetime and will require replacement after several years (again,

frequency undetermined). Likewise uninterruptable power supply batteries only have a finite life and will require

replacement too. The latter two maintenance activities will require outages and are expected to be undertaken by

Applied Materials or its associates. Fan replacement/cleaning could be done by the customer.

Who owns the unit at the end of the project?

Assuming the project is successful, a reference site is more important to Applied Materials than the cost of the

equipment. They will be willing to gift the device to either UKPN or the customer as appropriate.



What power does the unit consume?

Energy consumed will include 36 x 20W for the cooling fans, + PLC, Communication equipment, display and,

potentially, a duct fan. Approximate total consumption will be under 3kW in total.

Are there any other losses?

There are some losses associated with the semi-conductor devices, hence the cooling. Approximately 1kW in terms of

power consumption for the fans and control and around 4kW at full load for thermal losses. A high impedance

transformer or a current limiting reactor may be 10X these losses.

Applied Materials is an American Company, is there a local contact?

Yes – Applied Materials has a UK presence and a specialist engineer based in the UK.

What do you want from me?

A demonstration site location, acceptance of the losses/power requirements, access to site for installation,

maintenance, customer visits and the like, photographs and videos, background information on your installation and

access to the data gathered by the system (like currents, faults, etc.) along with background data which we can use for

publications, marketing, etc.



11.9 Understanding Customers’ Requirements information gathering form

Safety is at the heart of everything we do. We will be working closely with our safety case expert

Frazer-Nash Consultancy Ltd, to develop the engineering knowledge necessary to safely and

effectively demonstrate Fault Limiting Circuit Breakers (FLCBs).

Switchgear will be installed to enable the FLCB to be isolated and by passed if necessary.

Decision parameters

Inhibit/Intertrip

A hard-wired protection system that automatically disconnects generators from the network under

pre-defined conditions, typically in the event of a transformer outage or other abnormal network

configuration that causes elevated fault levels.

Powerful-CB relationship to inhibit

Under traditional “inhibit scheme”, your generator would need to disconnect and would be unable

to export whenever our network is running in an abnormal configuration. If you installed a FLCB

through Powerful-CB, your generator would be tripped only if a fault occurs on our network, and

you would be allowed to restart your generator after a few seconds.

1. How long would it take you to restart and resynchronise your generator after an

unplanned generator trip?

2. Can you resync your generator remotely and is this done through a third party?

3. Would an inhibit scheme ever be preferable to Powerful-CB?

4. What are your biggest concerns and why?

a. Damage to the generator

b. Restarting time

c. Impact on site operations

d. Contractual obligations

e. Penalty payments from capacity and balancing services contracts

f. Logistics of installation

g. Commercial arrangements

Cost

5. What generation capacity would make your business case feasible if you were to

incorporate Powerful-CB at a cost of circa £300k? Please give details if possible

6. For your business case, what is the optimal cost? Please give details if possible

7. How would you prefer financing work for the substation solution?

Shared amongst generators, based on capacity or other?

Please share any thoughts or requirements you have on this matter.



Space

The Powerful-CB is modular and can be stacked in two ways:

2.4 deep x 2m long x 2.2m tall

1.2m deep x 4m long x 2.2m tall

8. Do you have a preference? Please explain:

9. Would your site accommodate either solution?

Weight

10. The unit is likely to weigh a few tonnes, would this hinder its use at your site(s)?

Technical

11. Would your generator be impacted from being abruptly disconnected?

12. Is ride-through faults something in which you are or would be interested in?

a. Would the additional footprint of this device be a showstopper?

b. What level of fault limiting can your generator handle without causing a

load rejection trip?

Frequency Response

13. Is your generator used for ancillary services? If yes

How many unplanned trips/ how many interrupted minutes per year would cause a

problem for your ancillary services contracts?

Is your contract via an aggregator?

Commercial

14. As part of the trial, we, our partner (Applied Materials) and potentially other clients would

need to access the trial site.

Do you envisage any of the above to be an issue for you?

What kind of access arrangements would you want in place? (host arrangements, access

cards, CSCS)

Operation

15. Are you looking to convert an existing connection agreement from Short Term Parallel to

Long Term Parallel?



11.10 Site Selection Criteria form

Criteria Essential Desirable

Location Within UKPN network area Within London

Connected to a fault-

level constrained

substation

Generation Type Synchronous

Generation Rating 1MW minimum

5MW maximum

Connection Type Non-Firm (inhibit)

Generator Operation Regular

Customer Operation Critical business activities not impacted

by trial activities

Willingness to be involved in

media/outreach

Space Enough space to install the FLCB

2.4m deep x 2m long by 2.2m tall

Site name and address

Meter Point Administration

Number (Export and

Import)

Generator type

Fuel type

Maximum Export Capacity

Maximum Import Capacity

How many hours per year

does your generator run?

Any special Connection

Agreement terms?

You can contact us with any questions by email to [email protected]

Please note the cost of the installation and device will be covered by the project. If you have any questions please

contact us on the details below:

Kellie Dillon | Innovation Workstream Lead | 07875 116 657 | [email protected]

Laura Daniels | Innovation Project Lead | 07840 386 059 | [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



sdrc 9.3.1 learning report october 2017 · a hard-wired protection system that automatically...

Documents